Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
by federal authorities. but in the beginning, he will not be given the usual miranda warning about the right to remain silent. instead, the government will invoke a rule that allows questioning a suspect without giving advice of rights. >> there is a public safety exemption in cases of national security, and central charges involving acts of terrorism, and so government has that opportunity right now. >> the government invoked that same rule in the case of the so-called underwear bomber. as in his case, it allows questioning to learn of any potential plots or accomplices that could present a continuing threat. >> the first questions the fbi will focus on are specific threats that he might be aware of. likely, are there any other improvised explosive devices? were there other people working in the network? the sorts of things that go directly to whether or not there's a continuing threat to public safety. >> reporter: he'll face charges brought by the justice department, because terrorism is a federal crime with a trial in a regular civilian court. and as in other high profile terrorism cases
, survived. he's an american citizen. natural i naturalized 9/11 of last year. should he be given miranda rights? should he be treated as an enemy combatant? that debate has started. give me the facts, first, what they'll do. >> this administration has made a policy decision here. first, that's number one. secondly, he cannot be tried as an enemy combatant in a military tribunal because that law was changed by the national defense authorization act of 2012 that says you can't do that to an american citizen. what some advocates, republicans, are saying such as lindsey graham are -- we understand, they say, we understand he's going to be tried in civilian court but start the questioning -- treat him as an enemy combatant under the law of war. question him by intelligence people. get all the intel you can. then turn him over to the civ civilian authorities. that's what they advocate. that's not going to happen, the administration has decided. he'll be questioned first by this special group set up in the last couple of years in terror cases called the high value detainee interrogation group,
miranda warning about his right to remain silent. they will simply use a federal law, a rule, that says when there's an issue of public safety, they can use an exception to the miranda rule that allows them to find out if there's any imminent threats, any additional accomplices, any other plots, any other explosives out there. but that only lasts, say, maybe two days and then they'll have to give him his miranda warning. and the justice department says often even in cases like this people continue to talk anyway. >> even though he wasn't mirandized and that was a question that was asked last night at the briefing -- >> right. >> -- right after he was taken into custody, he doesn't lose his rights, right? >> well, he has -- that's right. i mean, he doesn't have to say -- he can't be compelled to talk. if he refuses -- if he just sits there and doesn't answer any questions, they can't make him answer the questions. but the one right that is sort of suspended is, normally speaking if the police ask -- if you're in custody and the police ask you questions without giving your miranda warning
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)